Rumor: NHL Expansion --how it changes Bruins roster management

[RedeyeRocketeer]

at a quick glance, teams with serious protection issues worth trading with. May have to be 3 way:

Rangers
Caps
Pens
Hawks
Wild
Sharks

Could be others, I just went fast and skipped ones where their exempt list was in question. But all those teams have real good guys they can't protect.

 

[Number8]

Rules say you can do one of two options: 1) Protect 8 skaters + 1 goalie or 2) Protect 7 forwards, 3 D, + 1 goalie. I'm assuming if you pick option #2 you HAVE to protect the full 7 forwards, not just cherry pick a handful.

I believe the following is a full list of players Boston must expose and their actual/assumed status. Does this seem correct - or have I screwed something up?

D Chara - Mandated
D Krug - Assumed
D C Miller
D K Miller
D McQuaid

F Begeron - Mandated
F Krejci - Mandated
F Backes - Mandated
F Pastranak - Assumed
F Marchand - Assumed
F Beleskey
F Spooner
F Schaller
F Hayes
F Nash

G Rask - Assumed
G Khudobin
G Subban

 

[BruinDust]

Rules say you can do one of two options: 1) Protect 8 skaters + 1 goalie or 2) Protect 7 forwards, 3 D, + 1 goalie. I'm assuming if you pick option #2 you HAVE to protect the full 7 forwards, not just cherry pick a handful.

I believe the following is a full list of players Boston must expose and their actual/assumed status. Does this seem correct - or have I screwed something up?

D Chara - Mandated
D Krug - Assumed
D C Miller
D K Miller
D McQuaid

F Begeron - Mandated
F Krejci - Mandated
F Backes - Mandated
F Pastranak - Assumed
F Marchand - Assumed
F Beleskey
F Spooner
F Schaller
F Hayes
F Nash

G Rask - Assumed
G Khudobin
G Subban

Add in Morrow.

And there are some Providence guys like Ferlin and a few others.

But by and large you got it.

 

[Altamira]

Edit: Forgot to quote

 

[Altamira]

To the best of my knowledge, and I could be wrong, is qualified or not, to keep them from being selected they would have to be among the protected list of Boston's players.

Certainly, in some cases, LV would be hesitent to select an unqualified RFA with their only selection from a team knowing that unqualified RFA could walk away in about a weeks time. It has been suggested by others they could use this strategy to try and give LV little incentive to select Subban.

But I'd wager to guess that if they didn't qualify Pastrnak, LV happily takes him anyways. So it won't happen. Probably the same with Spooner.

What you say makes sense to me

Pasta and Spooner are not exempt, but unless they are under contract they aren't allowed to count as an exposed player. I think that's what I was missing.

 

[bob27]

Starting to think that Vegas will select Riley Nash from the Bruins. His contract will cause them least amount of pain. What an awful selection we have for them. Really highlights the lack of depth on this team. I think they'd rather take a 7th round pick over any exposed Bruins player.

 

[TMac21]

Does Vegas have to select at least 1 player from each team?

 

[BruinDust]

Does Vegas have to select at least 1 player from each team?

Yes, 1 per team, 30 selections. The can cut deals to agree not to select certain players, but they still have to take one from each club.

 

[TMac21]

Yes, 1 per team, 30 selections. The can cut deals to agree not to select certain players, but they still have to take one from each club.

Right on.

 

[Judge Smails]

Rules say you can do one of two options: 1) Protect 8 skaters + 1 goalie or 2) Protect 7 forwards, 3 D, + 1 goalie. I'm assuming if you pick option #2 you HAVE to protect the full 7 forwards, not just cherry pick a handful.

I believe the following is a full list of players Boston must expose and their actual/assumed status. Does this seem correct - or have I screwed something up?

D Chara - Mandated
D Krug - Assumed
D C Miller
D K Miller
D McQuaid

F Begeron - Mandated
F Krejci - Mandated
F Backes - Mandated
F Pastranak - Assumed
F Marchand - Assumed
F Beleskey
F Spooner
F Schaller
F Hayes
F Nash

G Rask - Assumed
G Khudobin
G Subban

If this is right, it seems to me C. Miller is the most obvious player to get selected. Would it make sense to move him before the x-draft for non-eligible x-draft assets?

 

[BruinDust]

If this is right, it seems to me C. Miller is the most obvious player to get selected. Would it make sense to move him before the x-draft for non-eligible x-draft assets?

Or they could just protect him.

Better him than Kevan Miller or Adam McQuaid.

 

[Judge Smails]

Or they could just protect him.

Better him than Kevan Miller or Adam McQuaid.

Gotcha, I missed the little detail that they could still protect him.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Is it too much to ask for a defense without McQuaid or Kevan Miller in our top 4 next season? (this season is too much to ask, but for next?)

 

[Number8]

Is it too much to ask for a defense without McQuaid or Kevan Miller in our top 4 next season? (this season is too much to ask, but for next?)

Not if we trade Carlo without also getting an equal or better replacement......

 

[ChargersRookie]

Is it too much to ask for a defense without McQuaid or Kevan Miller in our top 4 next season? (this season is too much to ask, but for next?)

Some have said that Charlie signs before season's end. This should indicate if Adam or Kevan will be missed if left unprotected.

Unless Bruins sign Charlie to stick him in the AHL.

 

[DominicT]

Only goalies (Subban) must be given their qualifying offers prior to the expansion draft - if they have no other goalies eligible and to make requirements. That way LV retains their RFA rights.

Forwards and d-men do not have to be given qualifying offers if exposed and LV retains their rights.

IOW, you qualify Pasta and protect him, you don't qualify Subban and you still meet requirements with Khudobin and of course, protect Rask.

I know everyone is pretty much done with Subban, I still think he can play in the NHL. Everyone is all "Oh McIntyre has passed him on the depth chart".

I am on the other side of the coin in that I'd be pretty disappointed if McIntyre didn't surpass him. After all, he is older and has been playing the position longer than Subban.

Just my two cents

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

Dom, I think Subban can play in the NHL too. I just think with so many teams have goalie protection problem, that Subban probably won't be selected based on who else will be out there. I also think Vegas will prefer one of our other unprotected guys at this point (probably a Miller).

 

[BruinDust]

Only goalies (Subban) must be given their qualifying offers prior to the expansion draft - if they have no other goalies eligible and to make requirements. That way LV retains their RFA rights.

Forwards and d-men do not have to be given qualifying offers if exposed and LV retains their rights.

IOW, you qualify Pasta and protect him, you don't qualify Subban and you still meet requirements with Khudobin and of course, protect Rask.

I know everyone is pretty much done with Subban, I still think he can play in the NHL. Everyone is all "Oh McIntyre has passed him on the depth chart".

I am on the other side of the coin in that I'd be pretty disappointed if McIntyre didn't surpass him. After all, he is older and has been playing the position longer than Subban.

Just my two cents

Good to know that F/D RFAs if are expansion eligible, qualified or not qualified. Makes things simple.

Subban is really turning his game around the last month or so based on his numbers.

I don't think, and I could be wrong, that Boston has much to worry about when it comes to LV taking one of Khudobin or Subban off their hands. Even as the 3rd stringer, I assume if he was claimed LV but then demoted at the end of training camp 2017, he would need to clear waivers anyways. Why even waste one of your 30 selections on a guy you might just put on waivers before you even play a game. It's not like Subban has any real trade value to LV.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

Good to know that F/D RFAs if are expansion eligible, qualified or not qualified. Makes things simple.

Subban is really turning his game around the last month or so based on his numbers.

I don't think, and I could be wrong, that Boston has much to worry about when it comes to LV taking one of Khudobin or Subban off their hands. Even as the 3rd stringer, I assume if he was claimed LV but then demoted at the end of training camp 2017, he would need to clear waivers anyways. Why even waste one of your 30 selections on a guy you might just put on waivers before you even play a game. It's not like Subban has any real trade value to LV.

Gibson/Andersen (my mistake, thx for pointing out it's Bernier now)
Fleury/Murray
Bishop/Vasilevsky
Howard/Mrazek
Varlomov/Pickard
Dubnyk/Kuemper

maybe Hank/Raanta


and I must be forgetting at least 3 teams

I don't think we're on the radar for the goalie situation

 

[Pia8988]

Gibson/Andersen
Fleury/Murray
Bishop/Vasilevsky
Howard/Mrazek
Varlomov/Pickard
Dubnyk/Kuemper

and I must be forgetting at least 3 teams

I don't think we're on the radar for the goalie situation

First isnt a thing anymore.

The real big two are murray/maf and bishop/vasilevsky. Rest are meh

 

[DominicT]

Good to know that F/D RFAs if are expansion eligible, qualified or not qualified. Makes things simple.

Subban is really turning his game around the last month or so based on his numbers.

I don't think, and I could be wrong, that Boston has much to worry about when it comes to LV taking one of Khudobin or Subban off their hands. Even as the 3rd stringer, I assume if he was claimed LV but then demoted at the end of training camp 2017, he would need to clear waivers anyways. Why even waste one of your 30 selections on a guy you might just put on waivers before you even play a game. It's not like Subban has any real trade value to LV.

Or they draft an un-qualified Subban, (which they can still do) and he walks away as a UFA if he doesn't sign.

They aren't going to draft three guys, for example: RedeyeRocketeer list. They are going to want at least one they can send to the AHL. I doubt they carry three NHL ready goaltenders.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

First isnt a thing anymore.

The real big two are murray/maf and bishop/vasilevsky. Rest are meh

More meh than using your 1 swing at Subban though? Not sure about that. I think there are some good goalies there Kuemper for example has a real nice ceiling.

 

[BruinDust]

Or they draft an un-qualified Subban, (which they can still do) and he walks away as a UFA if he doesn't sign.

They aren't going to draft three guys, for example: RedeyeRocketeer list. They are going to want at least one they can send to the AHL. I doubt they carry three NHL ready goaltenders.

Probably not, that 3rd AHL guy they can find one off the UFA scrap heap during the summer, shouldn't be hard.

Now I might be wrong again, but can't they select 3 goaltenders (or 4, or 5) and use the extra ones as trade bait to make deals and get more desirable assets if those G are clearly the most valuable player of what a particular team has available.

At the end of the day, they won't go into camp with 3 NHL caliber goaltenders in their organization like you said.

 

[DominicT]

Probably not, that 3rd AHL guy they can find one off the UFA scrap heap during the summer, shouldn't be hard.

Now I might be wrong again, but can't they select 3 goaltenders (or 4, or 5) and use the extra ones as trade bait to make deals and get more desirable assets if those G are clearly the most valuable player of what a particular team has available.

At the end of the day, they won't go into camp with 3 NHL caliber goaltenders in their organization like you said.

Sure, they can. They must select 14 forwards, 9 d-men and 3 goalies out of the 30 so those extra four can be anything.

I'm not sure I would, nor do I think you would, select 4 or 5 NHL goalies in hopes of being able to trade 2 or 3 of them if we were running the team. I think I would look more to, for example, give me a pick not to select MAF rather than try and find a trading partner afterwards.

If it were me, i'd look at one of my three goaltending picks to be a prospect that projects to be an NHL goaltender that I could send down to the AHL with zero risk of losing - a guy like McIntyre for instance (who is neither eligible or must be protected BTW).

I think when you're starting a team from scratch, you have to play it safe.

 

[BruinDust]

Sure, they can. They must select 14 forwards, 9 d-men and 3 goalies out of the 30 so those extra four can be anything.

I'm not sure I would, nor do I think you would, select 4 or 5 NHL goalies in hopes of being able to trade 2 or 3 of them if we were running the team. I think I would look more to, for example, give me a pick not to select MAF rather than try and find a trading partner afterwards.

If it were me, i'd look at one of my three goaltending picks to be a prospect that projects to be an NHL goaltender that I could send down to the AHL with zero risk of losing - a guy like McIntyre for instance (who is neither eligible or must be protected BTW).

I think when you're starting a team from scratch, you have to play it safe.

Makes sense.

For the 3rd guy, a guy like Subban was in his 4th pro season, where he would be expansion eligible based on having already played 3 pro seasons, but still waiver exempt so you don't risk losing that player in October, would be ideal for them.